Gustav

Is it just me, or has this hurricane gotten an unusual amount of television coverage?

Changing the topic - it's Sunday, so here's a sermon:

New From MilBlogs TV

"Things to do in Kuwait" - starring newcomers Barak Obama and Sarah Palin.

On Gaps

Much comment on McCain's Veep choice centers on the fact that she's a she. I noticed her gender myself, I must say. But Mrs G did also, as did my daughters, so I think it's okay that I did, too. My first response was that the balance on age/experience between the two Party's teams would facilitate a much welcomed issues-based examination of the candidates. Unfortunately, the Obama campaign's first response ("Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency") proved me wrong, in a manner that still has me shaking my head. (And not just because only voters can actually put her there.) The idea that his Party faithful are going to advance that attack (and indications are that they will indeed - even as Obama tacks in a different direction) just baffles me - I thought Obama gained from taking "experience" off the table.

Another early Democratic response to McCain's choice seems more sensible at first - but on further review might also prove problematic - insofar as it misses the point. From the Democrats perspective, dismissing his pick as a naive attempt to pick up more disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters makes sense if one believes - as I do - that most people choose their candidates based on their political Party affiliation, and most others based on their position on issues. Any Hillary supporters in either group should naturally gravitate to Obama - not McCain.

Here (via The Volokh Conspiracy) is some evidence for that claim. There may be specific issues where one can find some separation between the two Democratic Senators (and in many cases those differences offer individuals valid - albeit personal - reasons to pick one or the other), but from any neutral "big picture" point of view there's not a whisker of difference between them. That may rankle staunch supporters of either Obama or Clinton, but perhaps they'll find this more reasonable: any difference between the two is dwarfed by the relative size of the gap between them and McCain. (Folks viewing from a position to the right of McCain might argue that point - likewise those on the left insist they see no difference between McCain and Bush - but it's all a matter of perspective, and mine is from elsewhere.)

Now let's go another step: given the above, once the Democratic Primary campaign was down to two candidates (and setting aside the "experience" argument for a moment) with all else being equal, from an achieving political ends point of view there was nothing inherently wrong with an individual choosing a candidate based on their race or gender - other than that you were going to be accused by the other side of doing just that. But to whatever degree that holds true for the Democratic primaries (and I acknowledge that solid arguments can be made against "100%") it certainly doesn't carry over to the general election - where the ideological gap trumps race and gender. While there are those who are already arguing that "racism" is the only thing that might keep Barack Obama from the Oval Office, whatever truth there may be in that claim stems from the fear of losing votes from racists who would otherwise support Obama (let's not pretend they don't exist) - not from racists who would support John McCain anyway. White male leftists have a hard time winning national elections in America - if the DNC didn't think Obama could offset the loss of the racist wing with new voters he wouldn't have gotten the nod. (One could argue these "new voters" are also racists who would never vote for a white candidate and have heretofore sat out Presidential elections, or one could explain them otherwise.) But even as we acknowledge that small numbers have made a significant difference in recent elections, let's all join together in hoping the numbers of folks I describe above - whichever side of the aisle they find themselves on and whatever the color of their skin - are too small to matter.

But here's the point that was first brought to my attention by my daughter (who is old enough to vote) about McCain's VP choice. Should McCain/Palin win in November, this sets up a potential Palin vs Clinton election in 2012. Obviously many things will have to happen just so in order to make that possible, but none of those things are improbable - and in fact, I think all of those things are actually likely, certainly more likely than a future Clinton presidency if Obama wins in November. That thought can't escape the attention of those Hillary supporters who would otherwise vote Obama on issues. In spite of what many may think of them, they aren't stupid - and four years of a compromising (as much as anyone can be in these times) Republican President and a Democratic controlled House and Senate might not be as repulsive to them as their Party leaders might hope.

Speaking of Hope - in every analysis I heard or read regarding either of the Clinton's speeches at the Democratic Convention the common theme seemed to be did they deliver their voters to Barack Obama? It seems like a fair question, but what annoyed me about it - though apparently I'm alone in my annoyance - was an unvoiced assumption that voters for a given candidate will actually vote for whoever that candidate tells them to vote for. It's a subtle thing - highlighting the difference between choosing someone to lead you or choosing someone to represent you. I like a balance, but in this instance there seemed to be an assumption on the part of the analysts that Hillary's voters were needing some leading. Again, this was unspoken, but I got the feeling it was something that went without saying. Maybe they're comfortable with that, but I'm not, maybe that makes me a male chauvinist pig in our brave new world. Or maybe just a racist.

Oh, memo to Joe (he'll know who I mean): Don't overuse the term "Sweetie" during the debate. Once or twice should get the job done.

Greyhawk predictions

We're sitting around the house of Greyhawk's talking about all the political brouhaha, and our middle child makes an insightful prediction.

Palin vs Clinton 2012.

Littlest Greyhawk sounds off with "it won't matter though it'll be the end of the world".

Love the conversations my kids come up with.

Patti Receives Prestigious VFW Award for Service

Van Zandt Award Given at National Convention:

For demonstrating inspirational service and citizenship in founding Soldiers' Angels, Patti Patton-Bader received the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) 2008 James E. Van Zandt Citizenship Award last week at the VFW 109th National Convention in Orlando, Florida.

Through Soldiers’ Angels, Patton-Bader has inspired hundreds of thousands of volunteers to display their citizenship by actively support American military personnel in this time of war. With over twenty different teams and programs addressing a variety of needs, the organization’s 200,000 members assist the deployed, families on the homefront, the wounded, and families of the fallen.

Patton-Bader sees the award as a testimony to the efforts and effectiveness of the volunteers she leads. “I am so appreciative that the VFW honored Soldiers’ Angels with this wonderful award, she said. “Each of our volunteers create ripples of kindness that add up to an ocean of greatness in support of our heroes, and it fills my heart that veterans know they are loved and appreciated.”

The Van Zandt Citizenship Award is given in recognition of selfless service and dedication that inspire Americans to better citizenship. The citation reads

"Awarded to Patti Patton-Bader in esteemed recognition and utmost appreciation of her selfless contributions and steadfast efforts in providing support for members of the United States military and their families.

As founder of Soldiers’ Angels, her extreme generosity, benevolent care and ardent concern for America’s troops, along with her tenacious dedication, have truly made her an inspiration for countless others, thus in keeping with the highest standards of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States."

More here

Way to go Patti!

Alaska Governor's Web Page Down

...at least when I attempted to access. Unusually heavy traffic, maybe?

Here's the Google cache.

This is the man I met at the White House

President makes a stop at Eielson AirForce Base

A short time later, the Secret Service opened the door and President Bush walked in. I thought we might get to shake his hand as he went through. But instead, he walked up to my wife with his arms wide, pulled her in for a hug and a kiss, and said, "I wish I could heal the hole in your heart." He then grabbed me for a hug, as well as each of our sons. Then he turned and said, "Everybody out."

A few seconds later, the four of us were completely alone behind closed doors with the President of the United States and not a Secret Service agent in sight.

He said, "Come on, let's sit down and talk." He pulled up a chair at the side of the room, and we sat down next to him. He looked a little tired from his trip, and he noticed that his shoes were scuffed up from leaning over concrete barriers to shake hands and pose for photos. He slumped down the chair, completely relaxed, smiled, and suddenly was no longer the President - he was just a guy with a job, sitting around talking with us like a family member at a barbeque.

<...>

One of the somber moments was when he thanked us for the opportunity to meet, because he feels a heavy responsibility knowing that our son died because of a decision he made. He was incredibly humble, full of warmth, and completely without pretense. We were seeing the man his family sees.

We couldn't believe how long he was talking to us, but he seemed to be in no hurry whatsoever. In the end, he thanked us again for the visit and for the opportunity to get off his feet for a few minutes. He then said, "Let's get some pictures." The doors flew open, Secret Service and the White House photographer came in, and suddenly he was the President again. We posed for individual pictures as he gave each of us one of his coins, and then he posed for family pictures. A few more thank yous, a few more hugs, and he was gone.

The remarkable thing about the whole event was that he didn't have to see us at all. If he wanted to do more, he could've just given a quick handshake and said, "Thanks for your sacrifice." But he didn't - he put everything and everyone in his life on hold to meet privately with the family of a Private First Class who gave his life in the service of his country

Godspeed Spc. Shawn Murphy. Shawn 24, of Fort Bragg, N.C., was killed by a roadside bomb Dec. 10 in Baghdad.

Thoughts and prayers go out to all the families who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

Thank you Mr. President for recognizing them.

HT: BlackFive

Veeps

McCain/Palin, Obama/Biden.

My sincere condolences to those who wanted to use McCain's age as justification to vote for Obama, and likewise to those supporting McCain based on Obama's inexperience. I hereby invite you all to base your votes this November on how the candidates stand on the issues instead.

And my sincere thanks to both candidates for making that a bit more likely.

Update: The official Obama response: "Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency"

A History of Violence

Last year:

...John Kerry was wrong when claiming (in an effort to undermine homefront morale in another war) that no one wants to be the last man to die for a mistake. In fact, al Qaeda will always have someone eager to prove him wrong.

But what if I was wrong - and they do run out of willing men?

This is what we've been fighting in Iraq...

...not teenage girls with explosives strapped to them - but the people who would strap explosives to teenage girls.

According to Reuters:

Under interrogation in a police station later, she said an older woman had strapped the vest to her and told her to go near the entrance of a local school and await instructions from someone who would meet her there, police said.

The AP story adds this bit of intel on the almost-"suicide" bomber:

Police in Baqouba, where the girl was caught Sunday, said she told them she was fitted with the explosives by female relatives of her husband, whom she married five months ago.

The AP says she is "14 or 15" - the original MNF-I press release says 13.

If you're still reading this - congratulations. Whether she's a brainwashed "willing" participant or a completely witless victim, the people who did this to her didn't want to kill her or her other potential victims as much as they wanted to make you run away. They lost twice - this time.

But this isn't a first - there have been other times children have been used in this manner (UN report from 2007), and there have been other "suicide bombers" who've survived. This is what we (and by "we" I mean Iraqis and Americans in Iraq) have been fighting since 2003. While the war is won, it clearly isn't over. In part that's because for every man in Iraq who's willing to strap bombs on his 13 year old 'bride' (and there they are a distinct minority) there are still thousands of Americans ready to call him a "freedom fighter". That's been the topic of our ongoing series here.

Reds (Part Two)

(Part one is here.)

A Fuzzy Pink Jackboot

Here's another book I think I'm fortunate to own: Winter in Moscow, by Malcolm Muggeridge. I say fortunate because Like Steven Vincent's Red Zone, the book is increasingly difficult to find - but they share other commonalities. Both tell the story of one man standing against the accepted narrative to reveal the true brutality of reality that others would prefer remain hidden - even though most would rather not see it anyway.

Let's draw a line from one to the other...

As to the unquestionably repressive nature of the regime, Mrs Eardley-Wheatsheaf thought that visitors from more civilized countries ought to keep their heads and to see things in proportion. It was true, as she explained at many subsequent lectures, pursing her lips tightly, perhaps a little venomously, that Soviet officials sometimes disappeared (she accentuated the word "disappeared" to give it its full significance); and naturally she deplored such goings-on, just as she deplored the press censorship and the suppression of all opposition opinion. A the same time she had to admit that, given the peculiar conditions prevailing in Russia, administrative disappearances carried with them certain advantages which she for one was not going to overlook.
- Malcolm Muggeridge, Winter in Moscow, 1934

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--for ever.
- George Orwell 1984 (1948)

We might reasonably have expected that with the demise of the U.S.S.R. the Useful Idiots would have shut down their operations, even if they could not bring themselves to actually apologize for having shilled for the most monstrous tyrannies in human history. Not a bit of it.
<...>
With the centenary of Lenin’s revolution looming on the far horizon, and after all the horrors of our age—mountains of corpses, oceans of lies—these fools are still with us. Wherever there is a jackboot stomping on a human face there will be a well-heeled Western liberal to explain that the face does, after all, enjoy free health care and 100 percent literacy.
- John Derbyshire, May, 2000

Let’s go back to the Iraq before we invaded, there was a good education and health care system, food for everyone. That system didn’t belong to Saddam it belonged to the Iraqi, it belonged to years of creating what a civilization needed. If your parents didn’t send you to school they could be put in jail.
- Code Pink founder Jodie Evans - August, 2006

*****

An amazing statement, given that a mere three years previously even the "liberal media" acknowledged the nature of the free education provided in Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Time Magazine, July 2003:

Reared on paeans to Saddam Hussein and forced to chant "Long live Saddam" whenever a teacher strode into the room, Iraq's kids will never learn quite the same way again. The Coalition Provisional Authority governing Iraq has ordered that the country's textbooks be stripped of pro-Saddam propaganda. Iraqi Education Ministry officials can't rewrite everything before school starts in September, but they're fixing what they can. Some items slated for pruning:
<...>
--Questions like this, from a second-grade textbook: "Who leads our great revolution?" Answer: "The person we are ready to sacrifice our lives for: Saddam Hussein, may God protect Him."
<...>
--Geography books that say, "Before the Baath Revolution landowners were dictators controlling the land and the people, and that's why we produced so little. After the revolution, everything went perfectly."
<...>
--Maps depicting Kuwait as a territory of Iraq.

The New York Times, October, 2003:

''We had to include him in every lesson plan or we'd be in trouble with the Baath Party,'' said Nada alJalili, an elementaryschool teacher at the Tigris School for Girls in Baghdad. ''When we taught about bacteria in biology class, we explained that Saddam brought antibacterial soap and drugs into Iraq. Whenever his name was mentioned, it had be followed with 'God protect him and keep him our president.' ''

Whenever an adult entered the classroom, the students would stand up and recite in unison, ''Long live the leader Saddam Hussein.'' Then they would sit down while reciting, ''Long live the heroic Baath Party.''
<...>
In music classes, they learned new lyrics for traditional melodies. The beginning of one popular children's song was changed from ''The daughter of the merchant has almond eyes'' to ''We are the Baathists. We have heavy weapons.''

During a flag-raising ceremony every Thursday morning, students would chant ''Saddam Hussein!'', ''One Arab nation with an eternal message!'' and ''Unity! Freedom! Socialism!'' Then a teacher or an older student would fire a round of blanks from an AK-47 rifle.

But three years later, the statement "If your parents didn’t send you to school they could be put in jail" (or perhaps just "disappeared") would be used as a defense of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Who could make such a claim? The same person who the year previously said this...

Were we as anti-war activists in the US really resisting? And if not, what would have to change?
<...>
We must begin by really standing with the Iraqi people and defending their right to resist. I can remain myself against all forms of violence, and yet I cannot judge what someone has to do when pushed to the wall to protect all they love.

...even as the "resistance" slaughtered innocent Iraqis in the streets.

These days Jodie Evans has taken a break from defending the boot eternally smashing the human face and encouraging terrorists to slaughter women and children and has turned her energies to fundraising for Barak Obama (an effort at which she has enjoyed significant success). But as he explained in his book, in 2003 Steven Vincent met her at a party in Iraq.

More to follow...

Obama vs Baldilocks

Long time milblogger Baldilocks, gives an interview regarding Obama and a small school in Kenya named after him.

She has a lot in common with Obama - who might be the next president. Both were born to Kenyan fathers of the same tribe (the Luo) from the same province (Nyanza), who as boys came to America aboard the same airplane.

Very interesting.

Reds (Part One)

A History of Violence...

This post is about 2008. More importantly it's also about 2009 and all the years thereafter. But we're going to drop back in time just a bit first - please bear with me.

We're heading for Baghdad, late 2003 and early 2004. Steven Vincent is our tour guide - there is no better. He is dead, of course, but because of that he's frozen in time via his writing. Our vehicle for this trip is In The Red Zone: A Journey Into The Soul Of Iraq, his chronicle of his journeys in Iraq in 2003 and 2004. To read it now is to be reminded of things forgotten - or nearly so.

He titled chapter two "An image of Hadeel" - after a picture of an Iraqi girl he had seen on a wall in Baghdad...

The photo - actually a color Xerox - showed a pretty, rather plump , reddish-haired Iraqi woman smiling at the camera, a Santa Claus cap perched on her head. Her name, according to an inscription printed beneath her image, was Hadeel...

"At the time of the photograph" our tour guide informs us, "the 29 year old had just gotten engaged, the nuptials set for mid-February."

The cautious reader will have a sense of foreboding at this point, a nagging urge to click away, go no further, advance no more...

Caught in an unguarded moment of laughter, hair mussed, eyes gleaming, the silly mirth of an office Christmas party behind her, Hadeel seemed like any young woman the world over who was anticipating marriage, children, and a happy future growing old with her husband.

But Hadeel was dead.

She was killed by a suicide bomber driving "a flatbed truck carrying a thousand pounds of plastic explosives and several 155mm artillery shells... It seemed the shaheed had intended to ram his truck into the CPA compound, but had prematurely detonated the device in rush hour traffic."

Trapped inside the car as she waited to enter for work, Hadeel burned to death.

*****

The people who killed her have supporters in the United States:

Were we as anti-war activists in the US really resisting? And if not, what would have to change?
<...>
We must begin by really standing with the Iraqi people and defending their right to resist. I can remain myself against all forms of violence, and yet I cannot judge what someone has to do when pushed to the wall to protect all they love.

We'll get around to sourcing that quote later - for now I'll only hint that the author has something in common with Hadeel, though she herself was never burned to death in a car on her way to work by people with a "right to resist".

*****

That last quote was from 2005, by the way. Terrorist apologists were fairly common in that year, four years after 9/11, two years into Iraq. It was a year in which three elections were held in Iraq, a year in which Steven Vincent was killed in Basra, and a year I documented a number of atrocities committed by the "resistance":

The suicide attack that was performed on an election center in one of Baghdad's districts (Baghdad Al-Jadeedah) last Sunday was performed using a kidnapped "Down Syndrome" patient.

Eye witnesses said (and I'm quoting one of my colleagues; a dentist who lives there) "the poor victim was so scared when ordered to walk to the searching point and began to walk back to the terrorists. In response the criminals pressed the button and blew up the poor victim almost half way between their position and the voting center's entrance".

A Shia Muslim from the Sadr City slums of Baghdad, Ahmed had joined the new Iraqi National Guard, only to be killed in his patrol car when a bomb planted by insurgents exploded.

The next day, as his family took his coffin for burial in the holy Shia city of Najaf, 100 miles south of Baghdad, they were stopped at what purported to be a police checkpoint near the town of Iskandaria and ordered out of their minibus.

Insurgents wearing fake police uniforms shot and beheaded six of the mourners, including Ahmed's mother. Then they ripped Ahmed's body out of the coffin and decapitated him too.

BAGHDAD -- A suicide bomber in an explosives-laden SUV killed at least 27, including an American soldier, late this morning in the deadliest insurgent attack in more than two months.
<...>
Many, if not most of the dead were children loitering and playing near U.S. soldiers at an impromptu checkpoint in Baghdad al-Jadida, a lower-middle class residential district populated by Shiites, Sunnis and Christians.

At the nearby Kindi hospital, hundreds of distraught parents mingled in blood-soaked hallways shouting and screaming as they looked for their children, many of whom were badly mutilated.

"If we are fighting a war against terrorism, terrorism impacts innocent people, so we want to show them that we're against that, and that's why we need to help these families that are so desperate."

Marla's campaign led her to Afghanistan and Iraq, while bullets were still flying and explosions were part of the daily routine. A terrorist killed her last Saturday as she and Faiz, CIVIC's Iraq Country Director, traveled to visit an Iraqi child injured by a bomb. She was 28.

The group said in a statement posted on the Internet that it had killed the envoy, Ihab al-Sherif, but it did not say when or how. The group said "that the verdict of God has been implemented against the ambassador of the infidels, the ambassador of Egypt, thank God."

"Egypt is one of those at the forefront of the war on Islam and Muslims," the statement said. "Its jails are full of mujahedeen." It showed a video of the blindfolded diplomat identifying himself but, unlike in other kidnappings, it did not show the killing itself, according to the Associated Press.

Iraq's most feared terror group warned foreign diplomats yesterday to flee the country after announcing it will put to death two kidnapped Moroccan Embassy employees.
<...>
The warning came in a statement posted on an Islamist Web site in the name of al Qaeda in Iraq, which also claimed responsibility for the July kidnap-slaying of two envoys from Algeria and one from Egypt as well as the abduction and beheading of many other foreigners.

To win the war against the US military and Badr, Colonel Jassam advises the Omariyun to follow two short-term goals - to cement mujahideen control over the Ramadi area, and to stage operations that will increase pressure on US opinion to withdraw troops.
<...>
To achieve their second goal, turning Americans against the war, the mujahideen need to shape their operations "to support anti- war sentiment in the west", he says.

And I watched a car bomb burn at a police check point in Tall 'Afar, the explosion killing no one but the people inside the car -- a man, a woman and two young children.

A suicide attacker steered a car packed with explosives toward U.S. soldiers giving away toys to children outside a hospital in central Iraq on Thursday, killing at least 31 people. Almost all of the victims were women and children, police said.
<...>
"It was an explosion at the gate of the hospital," a woman who had wounds on her face and legs told the AP. "My children are gone. My brother is gone."

With no room left at the hospital, emergency workers rushed victims to hospitals in Baghdad, about 15 miles to the north. And when the hospital morgue was full, the workers were forced to place the dead in the hospital garden so family members could find them.

But Shaya said he was injured even before he went on the mission when insurgents detonated a truck bomb he was supposed to leave at a target site.
<...>
"They asked me to take the truck near a concrete block barrier before turning to the right and leaving it there," he says. "There, somebody will pick up the truck from you," they told him.

"But they blew me up in the truck," he says.
<...>
Ahmed's truck bomb killed nine people, including a family of seven in their house nearby.

"Terrorism was in London. Terrorism was in Spain. Terrorism was, obviously, in the United States.

"That's completely separate from what's going on in Iraq. Iraq is an insurgency.
<...>
"Very small proportion of the people that are involved in the insurgency are terrorists or how I would interpret them as terrorists."
- John Murtha

*****

Were we as anti-war activists in the US really resisting? And if not, what would have to change? <...> We must begin by really standing with the Iraqi people and defending their right to resist. I can remain myself against all forms of violence, and yet I cannot judge what someone has to do when pushed to the wall to protect all they love.

All from 2005. And 2006 saw even more death and destruction. But the irony within that final quote is that 2006 is also the year that the Iraqi people did find their backs to the wall and increasingly exercised their right to resist - against the people who actually were slaughtering them in the streets. It was the year of the Samarra bombing and the year of "civil war in Iraq" headlines, but it was also the year of Anbar Awakening, and the year America figured things out. It was the year we almost lost, but almost doesn't count. And it was the year I began with a review of 2005 that ended like this:

And now 2006 has begun. As noted here early last year (and repeated)

If you've been reading Mudville for any time at all you must have gotten the message: the insurgents are on the ropes. Make no mistake about it - they are capable of killing people in large numbers, but their political effectiveness is virtually nil.

"Capable of killing people in large numbers" - proven.

"...but their political effectiveness is virtually nil". - Three successful elections in Iraq support the accuracy of the claim. But an unexpected element has boosted the political effectiveness of the killers of children, aid workers, diplomats, and anyone else finding themselves at the wrong place at the wrong time. No matter how high the body count or how heinous their crimes, terrorists now believe they have allies who won't abandon their cause - and that faint glimmer of hope seems to be all they need.

*****

To win the war against the US military and Badr, Colonel Jassam advises the Omariyun to follow two short-term goals - to cement mujahideen control over the Ramadi area, and to stage operations that will increase pressure on US opinion to withdraw troops. <...> To achieve their second goal, turning Americans against the war, the mujahideen need to shape their operations "to support anti- war sentiment in the west", he says.

By 2007, they could time their most heinous attacks to coincide with US Congressional votes - and few would even notice the connection...

Reid, the Senate's top Democrat, described part of a meeting with Bush at the White House on Wednesday -- the same day bombs killed almost 200 people in Baghdad in the worst day of violence since a U.S.-backed security crackdown was launched there earlier this year.

"This is the message I took to the president," Reid said at a news conference.

"Now I believe myself ... that this war is lost, and that the surge is not accomplishing anything, as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday," said Reid, of Nevada.

But 2007 was the year we won the war. We poured in troops and got things done and while strident voices on the home front demanded we abandon Iraq (and some would maintain the 2006 fiction that we were "caught in the crossfire of a civil war") none would dare argue the 2005 point that we were fighting against a righteous and noble "resistance".

What if we had chosen another course? What if we had pulled back instead of pushing forward? One possible answer can be gleaned from the British experience of the last three years - an experience I documented here. In compiling that I realized that in hindsight - even more so than when new - Steven Vincent's posts from Basra were amazing. They filled a huge gap in the narrative of Southern Iraq, and revealed a population begging the British to remain in force or for the more "aggressive" Americans to replace them - even as our allies acted on the theory that their presence was only making things worse, that only if left to themselves would the Iraqis work things out. The failure of that theory is evident now - in hindsight - but the warning signs were glaringly obvious if one reads the first-hand accounts of Basra in 2005 that cost Steven Vincent his life.

*****

Part two is here.

Afghanistan's first ever Olympic Medal

Something to cheer in Afghanistan:

Rohullah Nikpai defeated world champion Juan Antonio Ramos of Spain on Wednesday to earn the bronze medal in the men's under 58-kilogram taekwondo competition, sparking applause, wide smiles and laughter in homes, restaurants and ice cream parlors around the country.

Af-Pak Reporting

Michael Yon is heading to Afghanistan:

An unintended consequence of the Iraq war was that we ignored Afghanistan/Pakistan, where things only got worse. Now many are calling Af-Pak "The Good War," but let's see how long that lasts. Our NATO allies hide behind the sturdy legs of the United States and Great Britain, who do most of the real fighting in Afghanistan, just as they did in Iraq.

Now that media attention is turning back to the Af-Pak war, let's hope that the sum of their reporting will be more informed and less biased than what came out of Iraq. If the Iraq model is followed again, the Western politicians will say whatever is expedient, bending to popular pressure created by the media, many of whom understand the bending of truth better than Einstein understood the bending of light.

Meanwhile, the press will meander around like a herd of buffalo, occasionally stampeding in unison off a cliff, and taking public perception with them to the jagged rocks below.

My recent month-long walk in the Himalayan Mountains served as a buffer between Iraq and Af-Pak. We won the Iraq war, and now it's down to relatively sporadic violence and the arguments about what we should do with all of our troops and enormous amounts of gear still remaining. Little doubt, many of those troops will soon be in Afghanistan. But if there was not enough firsthand reporting from Iraq, there promises to be even less in Af-Pak. This front likely will not end as quickly, or as neatly, as Iraq. It could take decades. And we could still lose.

and is asking for your support for his reporting there. Please consider donating if you like his work.

The last time I headed to Afghanistan, I spent far more money than I earned. Folks just didn't seem to care about that war. I am willing to stick it out, and have already proven that willingness in Iraq, but I simply will be unable to do so without generous reader support. These days support is scant. Folks seem to think I got rich off Moment of Truth in Iraq (I didn't). There will probably be no independent journalists who spend more than a month or so in Af-Pak during any given year. Same with the mainstream reporters I know. This means there will be almost no firsthand reporting from the Af-Pak battlefields, and less than a trickle comes to today. If readers want me there, I'll commit, but reader support is absolutely critical. I can't do it without you, and your support is needed TODAY. I should be in Afghanistan later this week.

Please support this mission by buying Moment of Truth today, or by making a direct contribution. Without your support, the mission will end. Thank you for helping me tell the full story of the struggle for Iraq and Afghanistan.

U.S. Army Olympians Win Gold!

Pfc. Vincent Hancock has won a gold medal in skeet shooting.

Hooah!

And Spc. Glenn Eller also won a gold medal last week in Double Trap.

A double Hooah!

There is an AMU commander who is blogging from Beijing for the Military Times . You can check back there every so often for an update on how our Army Olympians are doing.

Across the Pond

Many of you will remember the horrible story late last year about the Brit's Military Rehabilitation pool having been closed due to lack of funding and support from the British government... and wounded British soldiers who were rehabbing at a pool being asked to leave because there were some at the pool who found the sight of the wounded veterans too upsetting.

These soldiers have fought beside our American Heroes... Some Soldier's Mom has the details on how we can extend our thanks.

Life is good when you have good friends.

But when your family doesn't support you?

Dear Private Tobacco,

just letting you you know that you've outdone yourself with your most recent 'update'. i gotta let you know that when i was celebrating Itzahk’s birthday...you remember him don't you? Have you told [THE TCN] about what a spunky little guy he is? Ah...i digress. So back to the party. the one image that i'm unable to let go of is that of Ariel Haddar clinging helplessly to a cheap little neck pillow with an image of you attached. [My wife got one of those “Daddy Dolls”] I guess that's his surrogate daddy. Either way, I can't hold back from telling you that i'm so sick of seeing that pathetic smile/grimace on your face everytime you feel the need to update us on your GI Joe mission. You can already see where i'm going with this can't you? Just remember, you are not a hero, nor will you ever be one. you are a deserter...plain and simple.

take us off your mailing list.

Ouch.

“You know, I think this war is officially over.”

Joe Honan, one of the Castle's two correspondents on the ground in Iraq, is a sailor from JFCOM attached to the Marines in Ramadi:

I couple of days ago I brought a number of Anbaris to Baghdad to get visas to go the states later this year. We set up VIP air transport to get them in, and were expecting to spend the whole day there. Well the paperwork was all in order, and it went a lot faster than we thought it would. So about 3 that afternoon we’re wrapping up and one of them comes up to me.

Him: “Can we leave now?”
Me: “No sir, the flight isn’t going to leave until later tonight. We need to bus you all to the landing zone after dinner.”
Him: “Well, can you just let us out at the gate? We’ll find our own way back.”
Me: “…..O.K…. how many of you Sunni leaders want to get left in the middle of Baghdad to find you’re way to Ramadi instead of flying with an armed escort?”
Him: “Oh we’ll all go and rent a couple of cars.”
Me turning to Gunny: “You know, I think this war is officially over.”

Won? Yes. "Over" not so much. But I think we know what Joe is telling us. Iraqis are starting to feel safe without the protection of our military. One step, a HUGE step, closer to being "over."

I've been hearing these kinds of stories all across the milblogs, is anyone listening to them?

These guys are in Iraq or have recently come home:

A Soldier's Home
Matel - in Iraq
Up Country Iraq
Fobbits need ice cream too
THIS WE'LL DEFEND
Rocinante's Burdens
101 Days With The 101st Airborne Division
Vince's experiences in Iraq
Notes from Tommie
Playing in the Sandbox
War on Big Tobacco
Miserable Donuts
Sergeant Grumpy
James Aalan Bernsen
Tragically Famous
Courage Without Fear
HILLAS' HISTORIES
TheAngryAmerican
Something on the staff
Armed and Curious
One Marine's View
Jason's Iraq Vacation
Brad's Excellent Adventure
LT Nixon Rants

I check their hit counters when I can and they're not getting near the traffic they deserve.

More On Contracts

(Or "are you smarter than a fifth grader?" Talking Barbie says "no".)

My contractors in Iraq article has benefited greatly from many insightful commenters. Those of us who've actually been to Iraq - or even just served in the military are aware of the important roll contractors play in everything we do. Obviously we understand the impact they have on our operations - so we tend to view any blatant effort to misinform the American public on the topic as an attack worthy of response. (We are military, after all.)

It's worth examining the tactic used in this particular attack, evident from the first paragraph of the AP story:

Military contracts in the Iraq theater have cost taxpayers at least $85 billion, and when it comes to providing security, they might not be any cheaper than using military personnel, according to a report released Tuesday.

The immediately obvious red flag is the word "might". If something "might" be something, it also might be something else - in this case, if contractors "might not be any cheaper", they "might be cheaper", too. A news story would be worded accordingly, an opinion piece would take the approach used in this example.

Looking into the actual CBO report cited in the AP story we discover almost immediately that there's additional deception involved in the first line.

Government (Defense, State, US Aid) contracts in the Iraq theater total $85 billion, DoD ("military") contracts account for the majority ($76 billion) of the total. Of that number, $54 billion is spent in Iraq, the remainder in neighboring countries ("the Iraq theater") ostensibly directly related to operations in Iraq. I'm not sure why one of the accurate statements that "Military contracts in the Iraq theater have cost taxpayers at least $76 billion" or "Government contracts in the Iraq theater have cost taxpayers at least $85 billion" weren't used. Congress - and the American people - should debate the expense, but likewise that debate should be grounded in fact - not something that sort of approaches fact. The CBO report presents the available facts - the authors should be commended. The AP skews them and renders much of that effort moot. That the skew is slight in this example is all the more puzzling - but the reader's concern for this level of detail will reflect their concern for how their money is spent and by extension the degree to which their opinion on the subject should be taken seriously.

So thus far in sentence one of the AP story we've seen numbers fudging and weasel words. But there's another deceptive technique employed in that opening line - surprisingly it will be exposed for what it is in paragraph 12 of the AP report:

The CBO estimated Tuesday that $6 billion to $10 billion has been spent on security work, and that the prices paid are comparable to a U.S. military unit doing that work.

What happened to $85 billion? What happened to might?

Simply put, while the first paragraph is arguably "true", the twelfth is important: it provides actual facts and enables the author, editors, and publishers a defense against any claims that they didn't. After all, it's hardly their fault if a reader doesn't get their message, is it?

But paragraph one is interesting because it combines two facts

A. America is spending a lot of money on contracts in and around Iraq.

B. America uses security contractors in Iraq.

to create a factual (albeit deceptive) statement (A+B). For some reason they then hammered in the deceptive "Military" (vice "government") claim in the first fact, and the weasel word "might" in the second.

Why? One answer might be gleaned from what's thus far missing from the full algebraic expression A+B=?. (If you missed it, what's missing was the =? part. Sorry for the math, but this is an article about economics, right?) In an opinion piece an author would have suggested an answer and attempted to convince readers to agree, in a news story they might present all options or none, along with arguments for and against various solutions. In the AP story the author insists that both A and B equal something they do not - this increases the potential difficulty of solving the equation correctly.

And that's the first paragraph.

*****

Other examples of using this technique can be found elsewhere - the sharp reader probably knows them when he or she sees them.

Here's one that was popular at the start of the surge:

A. Marines serve 8-month tours in Iraq, many are on their third or fourth.

B. Soldiers serve 12-month tours, during the surge that was increased to 15. A few are shipping out for their third tour.

"Soldiers and Marines are serving more and longer tours in Iraq, and as the Army extends tour lengths to 15 months some are preparing to deploy for their fourth or fifth rotation in Iraq"

Add in Air Force four-month tours and you can have all sorts of fun with that one.

Here's another that seems to be replayed frequently:

A. Thousands of Soldiers get re-enlistment bonuses. Infantrymen - the bulk of the Army's numbers - can get up to a maximum of $10,000 depending on their rank, experience, and length of reenlistment.

B. A very few other soldiers - those in extremely difficult to fill specialties that require lengthy training or unique and rare qualifications - can qualify for very large bonuses up to a $40,000 maximum, again based on rank, experience, and length of reenlistment.

"In an effort to retain thousands of soldiers needed during the unpopular Iraq war, the Army is increasingly offering cash bonuses of up to $40,000 to maintain it's depleted ranks."

Factual, even if they don't add up to whole truth. Again, this sort of stuff doesn't really matter - unless it shapes the national debate. But surely our elected representatives are a bit too sharp to be hoodwinked and bamboozled by this sort of first grade math problem, right? Surely they wouldn't accept that sort of ignorance and assist its further spread? Surely they know the facts about the American military....

Getting Our Money’s Worth in Iraq?

Can both of these statements be true?

Military contracts in the Iraq theater have cost taxpayers at least $85 billion, and when it comes to providing security, they might not be any cheaper than using military personnel, according to a report released Tuesday.

Government security contracts in the Iraq theater have cost taxpayers at least $3 billion since the war began, but offer substantial taxpayer savings, according to a report released Tuesday.

They're both referring to the same report - but one comes from the AP and the other was written by a blogger - and one of them wants you to know where the rest of that $85 billion is spent.

You'll probably want more details before making up your mind, but here I'll only add two: It's not at Mudville, but the blogger is me.

Blogworld Expo / MilBlog Conference (BUMPED W/ MANY UPDATES)

Blog World Radio will have special guests today Andi, Greyhawk and Bill Roggio will all be on today Aug 15th at Noon Pacific Time. You don't want to miss it. Click on Blogtalk radio widget to listen.

UPDATE 1 - SURPRISE! Andi has pulled it off again with big names at the MilBlog Conference. Pete Geren, Secretary of the U.S. Army, and General George Casey, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, join us via phone for the Blogger's Roundtable panel.

And I hear there are more surprises ahead.

MANY MORE UPDATES SEE BELOW

REGISTRATION:

UPDATE 2- ANDI has an important note:

We've received some email from folks claiming they're going to attend the conference, but who haven't requested registration codes. Just an FYI - you can't show up on the day of and gain admittance. BWE has a registration policy and we need to comply with that. Those of you who are registered and are bringing spouses or family members who are not, they will need to register.

So, if you're planning to attend but haven't requested your code and registered (free for milblog attendees), please request your code.

----------------------------------------

1. To register for the milblogs (and and only milblogs) conference, first send an email (with "Request Code" in the subject line) to andi-at-andisworld-dot-com. You'll receive a registration code via return email. (It may take a couple of days or so for you receive your code. Please don't send follow-up email or worry about it unless it's been more than seven days and you've received no response.)

If you're a panelist, speaker or moderator, you will register as a speaker and will not need a registration code. Information on how to register will be emailed soon to all speakers. We're still waiting for these instructions if anyone else recieved these instructions let us know.

Greyhawk has all registration instructions compiled together here.

LODGINGS:

Blocks of rooms at various hotels in Las Vegas have been reserved for registrants of Blog World Expo. The discounted rates will only be good until August 18, so it's best to make your reservations now. THEY ARE GOIN' FAST!

Although an official "milblog" hotel has not been designated, according to Andi, survey seems to indicate that many milbloggers are staying at the Marriott Courtyard, or the Sahara. If you'd like to try to stay together as a group, please leave your lodging suggestions in the comment section here or the MB Conference site.

We're (I'm) staying at the Marriot Courtyard with nice fluffy bedding. Greyhawk on the other hand will be wandering and sleeping in the Nevada desert in full cammo gear with his ipod full of Metallica, killing his own food (hope he likes snakes and armadillos) and trying to add a turret to Some Soldier's Mom's vehicle. (sigh)

We plan on enjoying Vegas a little before the conference, we're arriving on the 18th and leaving on the 22nd. We're trying to have a gathering somewhere on Friday evening, so please leave a comment if you'd like to be in on this and we can coordinate times and location via emails.

FYI , If you want to stay at the Marriot Courtyard they still have rooms available outside the Blogworld expo block ($134.00/night) at a more expensive rate ($170.00/night) but if you're active duty military, you qualify for a discount outside the Blogworld expo block - at $108.00 a night except Sunday night ($229, not sure why that is). I suggest you go thru Blog Expo for this night. If reservations for Marriot are made online instead of called in, put GOV in the spot for Corporate/promotional code. You will need to show military ID upon arrival.

According to Military.com the (ahem) Hilton has military discounts as well for $97.00 a night. Be sure you ck to see if these apply to the BWE dates.

Here are some other Hotels in Vegas offering Military discounts.

Need to get rooms now. THEY ARE GOIN' FAST!

Also Southwest Airlines and Continental have the cheapest airfare, go thru them directly.

TRADITION:

At the 2007 MilBlog Conference, we threw a huge baby shower for a severely wounded Marine and his wife. The gift table was overflowing with gifts from generous conference attendees. Semper Fi Wife had the honor of delivering a truck full of gifts to Bethesda Naval Hospital, and reported that the couple was a bit shocked to see the amount of gifts that complete strangers provided for their baby.

Soldier's Mom reminds us that we have the opportunity to throw a baby shower for another deserving couple this year. If you don't know the story of Jayme and Joey Bozik, you should study up. Jayme is due Christmas Eve. They are having a girl...Violet Skye Bozik. We'll continue the tradition this year with Baby Bozik as our inspiration.
Andi has details here.

Not everyone has to purchase something but a congrats and thank you for your service card would be nice.

UPDATE 3 - NEW TRADITIONS:

The MilBlog community has always been involved with raising money and awareness to, such worthy organizations and charities as Soldiers' Angels, Sew Much Comfort, The Injured Semper Fi Marine Fund and more. These organizations do so much for our wounded warriors and their families, and every dime the milblog community has raised has helped them continue their important work.

Beginning with the 2008 MilBlog Conference, we'll adopt one worthy organization per year and use our conference as an informal fundraiser. This idea came from Soldiers' Mom , a woman (a mom to all) who unfortunately had come to know these organizations quite well when her son was injured.

There will be a donation jar at the site, and whatever is donated will be sent to the organization. Checks and cash will be accepted, but checks are preferable The organization chosen this year is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization, so your contribution is tax-deductible
We will announce this year's pick at the conference. The donation jar will be available to attendees all day on September 20th.

There is no pressure on any attendee to contribute, it's a "donate if you wish" deal, we'll raise what we can

Lookin' forward to meeting up with old friends and meeting some new faces. Hope to see you all there.

SPONSORS:

Anyone who wants to show their support for the milblogging community by purchasing a sponsorship package that is sure to get your company or organization noticed, and will help offset the costs of the 2008 MilBlog Conference. Corporate sponsorships are now available.

Andi has details here:

Thank you Andi again for all your efforts you put into this, hugs coming your way.

The Strongest Tribe

Any book by Bing West on Iraq is a must-read. Here's his latest: The Strongest Tribe: War, Politics, and the Endgame in Iraq.

The opening line from West's recent Wall Street Journal piece caused a bit of a stir: "The war I witnessed for more than five years in Iraq is over." That could be easily misinterpreted - read only the first and last pairs of words and you might mistakenly believe he's saying "the war is over". But there's a reason West expanded his statement beyond those four words - it isn't. A different sort of war goes on - though if it goes on in the same direction much longer it will soon be something other than war.

But there's also a reason I specified a bit of a stir - it's difficult enough to argue reasonably against even the misinterpreted version of West's comment, and impossible to provide a valid argument against what he actually said. This may cause some consternation among those who believe they can "end" this war (an option available only to the losers anyway) but we've reached another turning point - no one has risen to the challenge, and if those same folks can't argue successfully that the war is even ongoing they'll have to find some other war to end.

Which leaves a couple of immediate questions: who won and how did we do it? The sharp reader will note I've already answered one. The second is what West's book is about. Further discussion for those who don't think we've won is rather pointless - for the rest of us there's much to debate over question two. Additional troops? Better strategy? The "awakening" movement? The kindness of Mutada al Sadr?

West has offered us his answers - and while you're waiting for delivery of The Strongest Tribe you can spend a bit of time reading his two part interview at Small Wars Journal (Part one - Part two). Like me you'll probably find things to disagree with therein - though perhaps like me you'll be glad to discover that winning isn't much of a topic for debate...

MilBlogs TV: The Surge

The trailer for the next MilBlogs TV production debuted in The Dawn Patrol today. (I think it makes an interesting short video by itself - but obviously I'm biased.)

The actual Surge series won't focus on the war on the home front depicted in the trailer, by the way. But with newly declassified documents, a green light to share some first-hand knowledge, and a large video collection to draw from I think many of the folks involved in that debate would benefit from viewing the final product.

By the way, if you read Mudville via rss it's likely you've been missing the Dawn Patrol. Since our last major site re-design it has actually been a separate blog, although both appear side by side on Mudville's front page. And if you miss the Dawn Patrol, you miss out on a lot of fine milbloggers reporting from downrange (and elsewhere.)

Embed code for the video:

<embed src="http://blip.tv/play/AcfeQY3NKg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="300" height="240" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true">
</embed>

As always, adjust size to your specs.

Georgia

The best (perhaps the only) tactical/strategic discussion I've seen yet on the Russo-Georgian conflict.

I get a bit more understanding of why South Ossetia matters to the Georgians - a mountain range between them and Russia. The Russians, however, have clearly demonstrated why such obstacles won't stop them from acting swiftly to demonstrate their love of freedom and concern for oppressed peoples of the world.

A Time For Lines?

Reuters: 'Clear timeline' urged for U.S. troop withdrawal

The United States must provide a "very clear timeline" to withdraw its troops from Iraq as part of an agreement allowing them to stay beyond this year, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said Sunday.

This should be welcome news on all sides. Iraq is in an upward spiral. While "fragile" may be an appropriate adjective for that spiral it's also less so every day. And in spite of endless claims to the contrary, the US didn't intend to remain in Iraq in force indefinitely.

Based on this and other hopeful suppositions, the command’s planners projected what the American occupation of Iraq might look like. After the main fighting was over, there was to be a two- to three-month “stabilization” phase, then an 18- to 24-month “recovery” phase.

That was to be followed by a 12- to 18-month “transition” phase. At the end of this stage — 32 to 45 months after the invasion began — it was projected that the United States would have only 5,000 troops in Iraq.

And most unusually, the "timeline" is arguably favored by John McCain (May, 2008: "Senator John McCain declared Thursday that most American troops would be home from Iraq by 2013 and that the nation would be a functioning democracy with only "spasmodic" episodes of violence") and Barack Obama, who part ways only in the rhetoric employed to describe the process.

Unfortunately for both sides in that political debate, neither wanted to acknowledge the scope of military progress achieved last year (we won the war.) After all, Democrats had invested heavily in defeat, and Republican timidity to call victory what it was can perhaps be excused by valid concerns that Democrats would ridicule them because:

1. All "reasonable" estimates indicated it would take 10 years to quell an insurgency.

2. Violence had not (and has not) vanished entirely from Iraq.

3. The knowledge that only the losers get to determine when a conflict has ended, and that al Qaeda will always have someone willing to be the last man to die for a mistake.

But consider this, from October last year:

It's likely that an increasing percentage of the "opposition" brought in (or buried) as we increase neighborhood patrols and operations will be the local trouble makers referenced in the linked report above. Barring our withdrawal, at some inevitable point they will get the majority of our combat focus in Iraq. <...> Alignment of groups and individuals throughout Iraq is ambiguous, shifting, and exceptionally difficult to determine by Iraqis, let alone US forces. So the possibility exists that that point at which local thugs with no larger alignment - ideological or otherwise - become the predominant "foe" in Iraq may pass without our immediate knowledge. But as al Qaeda crumbles, other local and regional Sunni and Shia groups join the "concerned citizens" effort, and the Sadr faction takes long overdue consideration of a political future the possibility of passing that point grows with each day.

While it adapted reasonably well to dealing with an organized "insurgency" (assuming a ten-year timeline is the "standard"), the US military is the wrong agency to deal with that sort of threat. But while it would be foolish to discount the Iranian influence and continued concerns with the Sadrist movement (if not Sadr himself - the two are distinct issues) I believe that day is in our rear view mirror. (But to continue the analogy - they are, however, still moving to catch back up...)

So I'm inclined to forgive the timid for missing the win. Meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle the cries for withdrawal timelines have been consistent (and oddly enough, unrealistically consistent with that original 2003 plan...)

April, 2007:

House and Senate negotiators reached agreement yesterday on war-funding legislation that would begin bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq as early as July, setting a goal of ending U.S. combat operations by no later than March.
<...>
After combat forces are withdrawn, some troops could remain to protect U.S. facilities and diplomats, pursue terrorist organizations and train and equip Iraqi security forces.

May, 2007:

Reid told FOX News last week that he would like to keep the Oct. 1, 2007, redeployment timeline in any new bill but that the votes are not likely there for passage.

September, 2007:

Senator Barack Obama yesterday presented his most extensive plan yet for winding down the war in Iraq, proposing to withdraw all combat brigades by the end of next year while leaving behind an unspecified smaller force to strike at terrorists, train Iraqi soldiers and protect American interests.

...and consistently nuanced, too. September, 2007:

The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.

"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.

"It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

But the basis for those withdrawal demands - the war is lost, the surge has failed, etc. - have been consistently wrong.

In fact, one might argue that those who made them have been like a stopped clock. But here's the odd thing about stopped clocks - they're on the whole useless but right twice a day. And when that time comes the argument that they are still wrong is foolish. But Republicans are in danger of making that argument by allowing themselves to be backed into a position that a drawdown in Iraq must be opposed if for no other reason than because the Democrats favor it. Lets be clear on one thing: rushing out the door in victory is as wrong now as it would have been a year ago to flee in defeat. The war in Iraq can indeed still be "lost" - but in addition to exiting too quickly we can also lose by dragging our feet - and while they are two distinct and separate things we can't count on folks who didn't recognize victory to realize when it's time to leave.

And the "new" argument - that victory can't be defined and/or could never be worth the cost - should at least be acknowledged for what it is - another signal that the war is won. While that victory will never be acknowledged the verbiage of defeat will soon vanish altogether from the narrative, the media will eagerly forget motive, wrongly describe those who called for withdrawal as "prescient", but rightly declare those who oppose it when the time comes as wrong.

Timelines. Victory. Get used to saying them. (They're really just words...)

News From Fallujah

Clean water is a critical need throughout Iraq. Now Iraqis in the Fallujah District of Al Anbar Province are one step closer to attaining that goal with the installation of solar powered water purification units. Marines and members of the Zobai Tribe
set up solar powered water unit near Fallujah.

Would Senator Obama be for that or against it?

Rielle Hunter/John Edwards Video Web Series - Episode 4

A film study series. Episode one is here.

Episode two is here.

And here's episode 3.

*****

"Are you going to ask me about Uganda?"

This one has a sudden ending! It leaves us hanging. Did he ask about Uganda? Did he announce? Did he find a way to pimp his web site? What happened next?

But here's the answer:

Rielle Hunter/John Edwards Video Web Series - Episode 3

A film study series. Episode one is here.

Episode two is here.

*****

"We want to make sure that the entire world knows about your struggle," he tells the Ugandans. Sadly, this video visit to a land torn by war and sexually transmitted disease has since vanished from Edwards' web page - and most of the rest of the 'net. That's why we're proud to offer it here.

If Rielle Hunter pioneered the point camera at subject and push little red button technique in the previous installment of this series, she certainly perfected it here. To add authenticity to the outdoor scenes, no effort whatsoever has been made to reduce the background noise. Fortunately, the Ugandan's words are sub-titled, and while John Edwards' comments aren't, we don't need to actually hear his every word to know and share his concern - this film is that good.

Episode four is here.

Rielle Hunter/John Edwards Video Web Series - Episode 2

(Episode one is here.)

"The tax payers are paying for this"

"This is not right - and all of us know it's not right. This is about responsibility and it's about basic human morality."

Here's the second John Edwards video by up and coming film maker Rielle Hunter. Serious film study students will be interested to see this one, in which a technique of pointing the camera at the subject and pushing the red button is pioneered. Many amateurs might insist this is the sort of thing their children do on vacations - but amatuers aren't paid six-figures to do this stuff.

The audio is poor quality - a masterful technique to get the viewer to watch and listen carefully - and the editing is somewhat choppy, but from what I can gather this episode begins aboard Edwards' Lear Jet, in which he is flying somewhere to attack retail giant Wal Mart on behalf of the "other America". If you don't come away from this with a real appreciation for Edwards efforts then you must be emotionally stunted. It's obvious to this reviewer at least that Ms Hunter worked hard, applied her talents, and earned every penny of her pay.

And here's episode 3.

Rielle Hunter/John Edwards Video

Why I am moving into video production:

She had been hired to produce Web documentaries for the Edwards campaign, at a cost of $114,000, even though she had no filmmaking experience.

It's going to be hard to keep people out of a career path where you can bring in that kind of dough with no experience.

But while most of the videos created by Rielle Hunter for John Edwards have vanished off the web, we've got one - and offer it here for academic purposes as an excellent example for other aspiring film makers.

Great opening quote: "I've come to the personal conclusion that I actually want the country to see who I am.. who I really am. But I don't know what the result of that will be. But for me personally, I'd rather be successful or unsuccessful based on who I really am, not based on some plastic Ken Doll that you put up in front of audiences. That's not me, you know?"

Another great quote: "I want to see our Party lead on the great moral issues."

But this is the topper: "You think most people have any idea what were doin' when we're not on the stage? All this - everything else that we do, behind... ...do you think most normal Americans have any idea what we do? We train to be careful. ...I have to tell myself, I'm trying to get hard to do it."

But I'm not sure I heard this part right: "I'll get into a little Rielle in my head, I can see it happening and I have to pull myself back out."

Update: More video found - our film study continues with episode two here.

Georgia, Russia, South Ossetia

Although competing with the Olympics and John Edwards for space in America's news reports, the story of developing conflict in Georgia has been reported in America.

Lesser known on these shores is the fact that Georgia currently has a combat Brigade serving in Iraq, in Wasit province, not far from the border with Iran. Some 'fog of war' confusion now surrounds the future of that Brigade. According to the AP

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili told CNN television Friday the troops would return urgently to Georgia after fighting erupted in South Ossetia.

"One brigade of Georgian forces is in Iraq and we are calling it home tomorrow," Saakashvili said in the interview.

...but according to the Telegraph, the recall might or might not be total:

Georgia will withdraw 1,000 soldiers from its military contingent of around 2,000 troops in Iraq to help in the fighting against South Ossetian separatist rebels, a top Georgian official said.

Georgia has asked the US military to provide aircraft to move all Georgian troops home from Iraq as fighting rages in South Ossetia, a US military official said Friday.

The Long War Journal reports the Brigade in Iraq represents one of only five in the entire Georgian Army, but even if swift redeployment were possible, the additional numbers could represent little more than a token resistance against potential Russian numerical superiority.

More details here.

A good round-up here.

Background on the Georgian mission in Wasit Province here, with a recent (though speculative) update here:

The Babil operation is likely a precursor to an operation in Wasit province, which may be launched in conjunction with the Diyala offensive. Wasit sits on the eastern border of Babil and the southern border of Diyala.

Wasit is the only central-southern province that has not been a focus of major combat operations. The Iraqi military started its rolling offensive in Basrah in March, and then proceeded to tackle the provinces of Dhi Qhar, Qadisiyah, Maysan, and now Babil. All of these provinces are major areas of operations for the Iranian-backed Shia terror groups.

. Ponder the situation in this manner: Georgia is already an American ally in time of war, and they've now been attacked on the homefront. The obvious question: how far will the US go to back a consistent ally in Iraq? The answer will send a message to the world.

Developing, as they say.

Update - AFP:

KUT, Iraq (AFP) — Georgia will withdraw its entire 2,000-strong military contingent from Iraq within three days to help battle South Ossetian separatist rebels, a senior Georgian military official said on Saturday.

"We were ready to leave today, we are ready to leave immediately but we are waiting for the green light from Tbilisi," said Emzar Svanidze, a major with the Georgian military operation in Kut, where 1,700 troops are based.

"For the moment they are asking us to wait," he told AFP, adding that 300 soldiers based in Baghdad as well as those in "another location" had yet to arrive in Kut.

And another:

The Georgian contingent has been taking part in an operation with US and Iraqi forces to clear the south-eastern corner of Diyala province, north of Baghdad, a known al-Qa